USPTO serial 76689347
EL POLLO Y LA PIZZA JUNTOS MEJOR SABOR PARA SIEMPRE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DAWE III, WILLIAM H
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 108 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with EL POLLO Y LA PIZZA JUNTOS MEJOR SABOR PARA SIEMPRE?
If you own this trademark, we can monitor new filings and help with USPTO deadlines. If you do not, we can file a new U.S. application.
Current trademark owner
Monitor this mark, or talk with CopyMark about this registration.
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
CLIFFORD G. FRAYNE
CLIFFORD G. FRAYNE KEVIN-SA-INC136 DRUM POINT ROAD SUITE 7ABRICK, NJ 08723UNITED STATESGoods and services
Related trademarks
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 8, 2010 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Mar 8, 2010 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Aug 10, 2009 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Aug 10, 2009 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Aug 7, 2009 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 7, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 6, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 19, 2009 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Mar 18, 2009 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Mar 17, 2009 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Mar 16, 2009 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Mar 16, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 6, 2009 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 6, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 5, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 23, 2009 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Feb 20, 2009 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Feb 19, 2009 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 19, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 13, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 11, 2009 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Feb 9, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 15, 2009 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 15, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 15, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 12, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 29, 2008 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Aug 29, 2008 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Aug 21, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 17, 2008 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| May 13, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |